Skip to main content

About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
MSNBCW 132
LANGUAGE
English 132
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 132 (some duplicates have been removed)
stewart tells chris christie to his face that republicans only like government when it's good for them. the same day christie vetoes health care exchanges in his state. governor howard dean joins me next, next. and republicans are pushing south carolina governor nikki haley to make the right choice to replace jim demint. will she pick right or far right? that's coming up. capella university understands businesses are trying to come back from rough economic times. employees are being forced to do more with less. and the need for capable leaders is greater than ever. when you see these problems do you take a step back, or do you want to dive right in? with a degree in business from capella university, you'll have the knowledge to go further in your career than you ever thought possible. let's get started at capella.edu [ traffic passing ] ] ♪ [ music box: lullaby ] [ man on tv, indistinct ] ♪ [ lullaby continues ] [ baby coos ] [ man announcing ] millions are still exposed to the dangers... of secondhand smoke... and some of them can't do anything about it. ♪ [ continues ] [ gaspin
term. december 14th is the deadline for states to notify the government will plans setting up health care exchanges mandated by the affordable care act. republican governors who have been dragging their feet can no longer treat the reform law like a boogeyman that will disappear if they wish hard enough. because, if i may borrow a phrase from method man, when the american people elected president obama, they let you know it's real. yes, it's really real son. even the president's political nemesis, john boehner, knows that to be true. >> you had said next year that you would repeal the health care vote. that still your mission? >> i think the election changes that. it's pretty clear that the president was re-elected, obama care is the law of the land. >> now, of course, boehner promptly walked those comments back later that day. that doesn't make what he said any less of a fact. central to the implementation of that law is the creation of health care exchanges. now, let me explain. these aca exchanges are online marketplaces. in short, websites. the idea is to force insurance companie
the government, that creates a backlash and they go up. i wonder if that's how you think about it or that's how the hisry played out. >> what impresses me is americans have been more open to revenue raising and tax increases. the period i study is the post war period in the united states, between the '40s and '70s. states were facing fiscal pressures. they raised taxes. this is republican governors and lawmakers, democratic governors and lawmakers. they found that individuals, you know, the voters, the taxpayers were willing to retain those taxes when put on the ballot. there's an equilibrium, you can go too far either direction. americans are actually quite happy with using revenue to solve the budget impasses. i think we have gotten out of practice, politicians in particular. >> can i add something? it's an interesting point, then at the federal level, what's fascinating is it did you want matter how high top marginal race has been in the last 50 years or 60 years. the ability of the federal government to actually collect more revenue as a share of gdp has been fairly constant. so there's thi
the tax burden that americans are paying to the federal government. given that, do you support the proposal put forward by john boehner? >> well, because the proposal is significantly amorphous, you could get those revenues through economic growth and we don't really have things nailed down, i don't want to talk about a hypothetical, but there is a danger that when you put revenues on the table, even revenues through economic growth, if you grew at 4% a year, reagan levels, instead of 2%, french levels or obama levels, you would net $5 trillion in additional revenue to the government, you could pay down all of obama's additional debt by higher levels of growth, not raising taxes. so there's a lot of money to be gotten from growth. how they do this, we have to see it written down, but because the obama administration and spokesmen have been so emphatic about all taxes and no spending restraint, all taxes and actually spend -- another stimulus, another solyndra stimulus program -- >> i don't think they've mentioned solyndra, grover, but i'm sure they appreciate your mentioning of
with the ongoing crisis in syria where the assad government is cracking down on its own people. and this week something significant happened. the president signalled a big potential shift in u.s. involvement there. here's what he said. >> i want to make it absolutely clear to assad and those under his command, the world is watching. the use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable. and if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, there will be consequences, and you will be held accountable. >> nbc chief foreign correspondent richard engel is in syria to bring us the latest on what is a developing story. richard? >> reporter: david, despite increasing criticism and warnings, the government of bashir al assad is revving up its activities. this area was bombed last night. regarding chemical weapons, commanders we have spoken to are very concerned that the government could use chemical weapons. they are completely not prepared for that eventuality. they don't have gas masks. they don't have medicine. there's no early warning system here. they have appealed for some kind
violates the due process law. quote, liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions. freedom extends upon spatial bounds. liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. the defendants are adults, and their conduct was in private and consensual, and, quote, to declare the issue as one related to the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward. so could it happen? could it happen next year? that the supreme court declare it is unconstitutional to deny people of the same sex the right to marry? what a question, what a story. joining me now is the president of the human rights campaign, chad griffin, and gay rights advocate elizabeth birch. i hope i set it up as best i could. i can't write the majority opinion next year. i think i know what the majority opinion should look like. your thoughts? >> i couldn't have said it better, chris. it really is an incredible day today, that the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case, the perry case, as well as the doma
liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions and freedom extends beyond spatial bounds, liberty presumes an autonomy of self-that includes freedom of thought, belief and expression. that certain intimate conduct the defendants are adults and their ability to declare the issue as one related to the right of engaging in certain sexual conduct de means the claim the claimant brought forward. what a story. joining me now, chad griffin and gay rights advocate, elizabeth bench. i hope i set it up the best i can. i can't write the majority opinion next year. your thoughts? >> i couldn't have said it better. it is an incredible day the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case as well as the doma case. when this case was filed almost four years ago, the prop 8 case, we made the case in court. in this country, we don't deny our citizens a fundamental right. the supreme court has called marriage a fundamental right no less than 14 times in this country. i'm optimistic once the court hears this doma case they will come down on freedom and libberality as they have. >> elizabet
are better off, they pay more in taxes. the government can pay for the usual things and pay down the debt. president clinton, the surplus, he got that partly from raising revenue. raising taxes. but also he did it in a way that grew the economy and the nation prospered and the debt became no big deal and then the debt was gone and the debt clocks that were supposed to be scary got shut off. that was because of prioritizing economic growth and being willing to raise revenues. look when we started growing again after the recession. it was not long after the stimulus kicked in. the government spent money and the economy grew. that's how it works. that's why it used to be a beltway consensus when the economy needed to e grow, you needed economic stimulus in terms of your fiscal policy. now the discussion about how we need to make sure we contract the economy and cause as much pain as possible to the people who will be hurt the most by that contracting, maybe that makes sense on sunday morning, but the rest of us go to work during the week and sometimes we go to parties. right now as we speak,
think there's a lot of money at the government. one of the things i've been doing on my tour is realizing the u.s. government has all kinds of earmarked moneys for minorities and women, particularly women. they don't have the money to market those opportunities but they're there. i think there's all kinds of opportunities where there's small business loan, government contra contracts, there's all kinds of things, other ways she can det money right now without giving up a piece of the company. >> this is going to be a war. knew get the last word. >> if i sold out early on i wouldn't have made the money made. i think those of us that know a certain market, she knows her market and extending it. usually when you know your market really well it becomes universal. knew don't have to be in the government to get the money. the private equity. i think she gets a lot better advice if she goes to an angel. >> we will leave it there and love a panel that disagrees with each other. thanks. >>> another company is seeing rapid growth thanks to a '50s pin-up star. bettie page clothing has c
's automatic spending cuts across every sector of government spending. even ones that are critical for infrastructure in our economy. so that's why there's such interest in averting this fiscal cliff. and i think that we can do that by simply taking up the senate bill. we continue the middle class tax cuts. >> before i let you go, starting today, same-sex couples in washington were able to marry for the first time because the state's same-sex marriage law took effect on friday. the supreme court announcing on friday, the same-sex law took effect at midnight. the supreme court announcing friday it's going to wade into the same-sex marriage debate. as a politician who is openly gay, are we on the cusp of a tectonic shift of sourts with regards to marriage equality in this country? >> i sure hope so, those of us who strongly support equality are looking to the court to do something. like the loving case that allowed for interracial marriage. like brown versus board of education. it's time to say you have the right to be in a committed relationship with the person you love and the gove
further $200 billion by changing the way government calculates the levels for social security and medicare. humbug, indeed. that's the christmas message from speaker boehner. "hardball" with chris matthews is next. >>> in the belly of the beast. let's play "hardball." ♪ >>> good evening. i'm chris mam ewes in washington. let me start tonight with some grave robbing. we're going gown to the dark, cold tomb of the late romney campaign. we're going to excavate the murky truths that were the living heart and mind of the defeated republican effort. going to exhume tonight the guts of the thinking that went on and went so wrong. tonight, we get what we only guessed at, the results of which played out in the numbers of election night. the nasty, anti-immigrant politics, the attitude toward that 47%, the failure to turn out the white male vote, the reason romney picked ryan and the wild prelude to the clipt eastwood performance. tonight on "hardball," the dark arona of what lies now beneath the dirt so we can understand what it looks like, to think and feel your way into a historic
reform debate, which may be apocryphal, "keep government hands off my medicare." the big tea party uprising was in large part a reaction to the idea, quote/unquote, of socialized medicine. it was the affordable care act, and the government, quote, takeover of health care, that fanned the flames of the post-obama tea party protest. but, of course, most of the actual republicans who were actually elected back then were elected because they ran ads like this. >> congressman brad ellsworth said he would protect our seniors. but when he got to washington, congressman ellsworth voted for the largest cuts in medicare history, over $500 billion. robin carnahan supports $500 billion in medicare cuts, hurting seniors most. rand paul doesn't support higher medicare deductibles for seniors. conway distracts with negative ads to hide his support for obama care, which cuts medicare by $500 billion. >> that was 2010. fast forward to this year's election and the same principle carries through. each side tried to convince voters that the other guy wanted to take the hatchet to medicare. >> the bigg
this before. >> some republicans believe that will give them more leverage. >> it's government at the brink all the time. >> these guys are not serious about negotiating.ç >> the next 72 hours are critical. >> i think we're going over the cliff. >> let's just go over the [ bleep ] cliff. >> let's go over the cliff. >> at least for a few seconds it will feel like we're flying. >> with 26 days to go until america goes off the fiscal curb, the house of representatives chose to end their congressional business for the week today to enjoy a long weekend at home, but john boehner stayed behind and spoke by phone this afternoon to president obama. it was their first conversation in a week. also, this afternoon treasury secretary tim geithner said this on cnbc. >> when it comes to raising taxes on the wealthy, those making more than $250,000, if republicans do not agree to that, is the administration prepared to go over the fiscal cliff? >> absolutely. again, there's no prospect to an agreement that doesn't involve the rates going up on the top 2%. >> "the new york times" reports that senior repu
't respond to, this party that has paraded around, the party that wants to rein in government spending, they are unable to identify any changes in medicare or entitlement spending which shows the tea party at its core was a phoney, phoney movement. >> joy, it's interesting to hear ron referring to august 2011 because a number of refers appear to have forgotten something happened in november 2012 called a presidential election. >> right. it was an election in which president obama, unprecedented for a democrat, actually ran on a platform of raising taxes. he said, i'm going to raise taxes on the top 2% and he was re-elected resoundingly with it. to what ron said, if it's only $14 trillion, what's the big deal, go ahead and let the rich pay it? that's number one. number two, the other thing that's been exposed and what's true, what's always been true about conservativism is that the core principle is the rich don't pay too much, they pay too little. when they say things like broaden the tax base, they think it's a moral hazard to have a progressive tax code. you want a flatter tax code f
not focused enough on what the government can be doing to try to spur job growth? beyond just -- >> there was a stimulus piece in the offer from the white house that was laughed at by the -- >> laughed at but could end up surviving. one of the things about the president's initial offer is it may have sent a bad signal to conservatives but it did have the effect of getting his folks behind him and really solidifying that base it felt in the past he gives too much and doesn't go for big enough in the beginning. this whole question of what, if anything government can do to try to stimulate additional job growth, something that he as president has to be thinking about, even if he believes, and i think he does, the economy is turning around if we can get this debt piece off the table, that it's going to free up more economic activity. but there's still a lot of caution on the part of business. >> and looking down the road, chris cizilla, the president also has a lot of foreign policy challenges, there's a threat of another nuclear weapons test from north korea, you've got chemical
unwarranted government intrusions, freedom extends upon spatial bounds. liberty presumes an autonomy ofself that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. the defendants are adults and their conduct was in private and consensual, and, quote, to declare the issue as one related to the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward. so could it happen? could it happen next year? that the supreme court declare it is unconstitutional to deny people of the same sex the right to marry? one a question, what a story. joining me now is the president of the human rights campaign chad griffin and gay rights advocate elizabeth birch. i think i know what the majority opinion should look like. your thoughts. >> i couldn't have said it better, chris. it really is an incredible day today, that the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case, the perry case, as well as the doma case. and, you know, look, when this case was filed almost four years ago, the prop 8 case, we made the case in court that in this country we don't deny our cit
that the justices will look at two questions. first, can the federal government refuse to recognize these marriages in the states where they are already legal and secondly, what's to come of them in california. >>> just a day after washington state become the latest allowing gay couples to get married, the supreme court said it will delve into one of the nation's most hotly debated issues. >> the highest court in the land has decided to take up what will be one of the biggest civil rights cases that this court could ever hear. >> the court agreed to take up the legal battle over california's proposition 8 passed by voters four years ago ending same-sex marriage in the state. a federal appeals court ruled the ban unconstitutional on grounds that applied only in california. but now that the supreme court is weighing in, the justices could get to the more basic issue. can any state ban same-sex marriage. nine permit it or will, so does washington diagnosis. the court also agreed to hear a challenge to the federal defense of marriage absent. it defines marriage as, quote, only a legal union between one
in the way of their total control. we live in their society. one governed by privatized moxcy. my claims are a little exaggerated. if you are reading between the lines, you can see the outline of this auto dmatonic takeover. the back and forth fiscal cliff on capitol hill has sounded more like a washington stage production of war of the world's. the myan calendar may have been correct after all. right on time, congressional republicans are crafting a doomsday scenario for the fiscal cliff. it would allow a vote on extending only the bush middle class tax cuts and nothing elseings, effectively slamming the ball into the president's court for a new year's showdown on the debt ceiling. no compromise on extending unemployment or altering the tax code for those loopholes or raising fed reral revenues. politicians are allowed to thrive off of our democratic life blood. what is missing in light of this january 1st manufactured deadline? any talk of the very real physical foibles in our country. we have chosen to ignore the ways policies have created a governor for and by the entity. when republ
the immediate impact from the government coming back and spending wouldn't be that great. the question then is how do businesses and consumers react? i don't think it will be a pretty sight. >> what about the debt ceiling? there was a suggestion? geithner's opening bid that they do a permanent fix and give the president the operative control over whether or not the debt ceiling is raised. there's a lot of confusion out there about what the debt ceiling really is. opponents to this tend to argue this will increase government spending when you and i know it's just to raise the limit for what congress has already appropriated to be spent. >> in a perfect world a debt ceiling is a stupid way to run a railroad. congress should appropriate what it wants to appropriate. the white house and the executive branches should go ahead and spend it and that's the way you should run it. we're not in a perfect world and we have the debt ceiling. i don't see any possibility that the republicans are going to permanently give up the right to weigh in on the debt ceiling from time to time. on the other han
the size of government. and i welcome that. he's choosing to do it outside now rather than inside the senate but he's had a huge, positive influence on the senate and we're going to continue to see that for years to come. >> senator, this may seem like a simple question, but i wonder, and a lot of people do is the senate from your perspective, is the senate a difficult place to be if you are someone who comes from executive background or someone committed to getting things done? is it a frustrating place to exist, day in and day out? >> i would say to you, i saw the article that you wrote earlier today, governors do -- who are used to having their own planes and flying around their states and controlling their own schedules do find it more challenging in the senate. i came from the state senate in wyoming. i enjoyed the opportunity to work with people on both side of the aisle to discuss the issues and continue to try to move proposals forward that i believe in about. i believe this is a place where you can make an effective difference in the direction of the country. >> now, let'
place in government. >> including at a federal level? >> including at the federal level. that's what elections are. collective bargaining. >> house democratic leader nancy pelosi pointed out jim demint was one of the ringleaders in voting down the u.n. treaty for people with disabilities this week. >> that was one of the saddest days, so anyone who was a party to that, well, i wish them well wherever they are going and hope that we can have more of our values represented there. >> it was demint and his tea party allies who pushed the country to the brink of default back in 2011. this is what demint told abc news about republicans who tried to strike a debt deal. >> what happens if -- what happens to republicans who go along with a debt ceiling increase? if they go along with the debt ceiling increase without a balanced budget amendment and the kind of stuff you're talking about? >> i think for the most part they're gone. it would be the most toxic vote we could take. >> demint's far right ideology is a key reason nothing gets done in this congress. house speaker john boehner is curre
that when it's all said and done, the government could save $5.7 billion. but those 65 and 66-year-olds don't disappear. they are still going to be here and get sick sometimes which means the savings we'd see by kicking them off they pop back up elsewhere in the economy. it's not pure savings, it's a cost shift. you're going to see increased costs for seniors who will have to find another health insurer since it uses power to pay less by quite a bit. the seniors turning to private insurance will have to pay more from the same coverage. 3.7 billion more in the first year of the policy. for those who are eligible for medicaid, will move to the states, we think. then there are the employers. many of the ineligible will turn to their employers. that will increase the health care costs of companies by $5.4 billion. some of the seniors will turn to the affordable care act in the insurance exchanges. those left in medicare will pay a higher premium because the average premiums go up for those older and sicker. that will cost $2.5 billion. in order to save the federal government $5.7 billion this p
to keep the government on track and keep the nation from going off the rails? we'll talk about that. plus, the push for marriage equality could get a huge lift from the high court. we'll examine what's next for those who want to see same-sex marriage become the law of the land. meanwhile, in egypt, they are just trying to get a functioning government off the ground. we'll go live to cairo where along with tear gas the words in the air today are martial law. >>> first, though, some developing news from south africa where nelson mandela is in the hospital right now. the former president is undergoing medical tests. that's according to the government. these tests have been planned for some time, we're told. they are consistent with his age. he is 94 years old. a family friend not saying how long mandela will be hospital iced, but a government spokesman insists there's, quote, no cause for alarm. mandela spent some time in the hospital earlier this year. he had stomach surgery. he became a bona fide world icon after spending some 27 years in prison for fighting against apartheid. in 1994, he
now on cutting government spinding, but when you ask them to identify exactly what you want to cut, you get mishmash from them. you get $100 billion in medicare savings by increasing the retirement age from 65 to 67. you get some unspecified savings from reducing social security. the only specifics if you add them up are about $300 billion or $400 billion in specific cuts, the rest are inspecific. this is the party whose fundamental premise is to cut government spending. you ask them to identify how they want to do it, and they start speaking in gibberish. it shows you this is a phony, phony movement on the part of conservatives to cut government spending. >> absolutely. ari, the president took a question on twitter this afternoon. quote, what is your opposition to taking away deductions for the 2% rather than upping the rate? seems like a reasonable compromise. his answer, not enough revenue unless you end charitable deductions. he's right, isn't he? the math doesn't add up. it didn't add up with mitt romney. it doesn't add up today. >> it doesn't add up, and those targeted revenu
question is whether they do so before or after the government goes over the so-called fiscal cliff. "new york times" columnist david brooks describes it this way. republicans will be raising middle class taxes in order to serve the rich. shafting sam's club to benefit the country club. if republicans do this, they might as well get mitt romney's 47% comments printed on t-shirts and wear them for the rest of their lives. so republicans have to realize they're going to have to cave on tax rates. the only question is what they get in return. michael steele is former chair of the republican national committee and an msnbc political analyst, and steve mcmahon's a democratic strategist. michael, you're on the republican side, and what do you think of that? the argument made by brooks which is more sophisticated. make your deal now while you can get something for it because after january 1st you will just be saving your rear end. >> i think he's absolutely right. i think part of that deal should include giving the president what everybody in this town agrees on, and that is those middle tax cut
to govern and i can only govern if i make you understand that i'm not going to put up with it anymore. >> it seems like an outburst that has been two years in coming and is loaded with things like, we don't have control of the united states senate because of you, tea party people who have given us nuts as republican senate nominees. and boehner's life would be so much better if he was working with a republican senate instead of the democratic senate he is working with. >> yes. and also, though, i think this message is that the speaker, he wants to govern. the whole point of coming to washington is not just to slash, cut, close. it is about governing. and john boehner for whatever you think of him is someone that wants to get a deal. he wants to govern. by doing what he has done, he is saying, look. enough with the games. we don't have the senate as you were saying. the only way we can do this is if i pull on the reins a whole lot. not just a bit. that's what he's done. >> the striking thing is how much outrage there is not. we had to comb around to find these comments. thank you very
in dollar value from the federal government than they pay back in taxes. so we're going to a majority of takers versus makers in america. >> chasing ever-higher spending with ever-higher tax rates will decrease the number of makers in society and increase the number of takers. >> we do not have a nation, a majority of takers, we want to have a majority of makers. >> to hear paul ryan take it, a sizable chunk of the american people are nothing but freeloaders, mooching off the productive folks at the top. that kind of talk made him the perfect partner for mitt romney, didn't it? but wait a minute, that was the old paul ryan, we've got a new and improved paul ryan and he's singing a much different tune. last night in his first address since the republican's defeat, romney gave some veiled criticism of his former running mate's 47% remarks by offering this. >> both parties tend to divide americans into our voters and their voters. let's be really clear. republicans must steer far clear of that trap. we must speak to the aspirations and the anxieties of every american. >> but you didn't.
that the federal government had to recognize it. but what this court was saying today was that they were going to look at a range of options but they were going to look at all of these options on the merits and that they were going to fully consider what it means to be an american and what equality means for same-sex couple. so we are very optimistic that in june we will have a ruling. >> what is the difference between these two cases? what is the legal issue that differs between the two cases that the court will be looking at? >> well, the defense of marriage act is a federal statute which says that the federal government cannot recognize valid marriages in states that recognize same-sex marriages. and proposition 8 is a law, a california law which says that only marriages between heterosexuals are recognizable in california. so the issue presented by the california ed case, if it's decided broadly -- that's a big if -- could affect every state. what's good for california is good for all of the other 49 states. >> jonathan capehart, i heard both richard and dustin very optimistic. i was recen
beneficiaries of medicare. it makes sense. makes the government much smarter for how they buy medicine for people under medicare. those are just three examples. but there's $600 billion of examples in the president's proposals. if the republicans don't like those ideas, and they want to do it differently, they want to go beyond that, they have to tell us what makes sense for them. and then we can take a look at it. but what we can't do is figure out what makes sense for them. >> in terms of tax rates, in your mind, you don't have to go back to the clinton era tax rates for this to be a workable deal. >> well, i think you do. >> all the way up? >> again, our proposal is to let those rates go back to clinton levels for 2% of the wealthiest americans. and combine that with tax reforms that limit deductions for the wealthiest americans. we think if you do that, alongside the spending savings, then you can put the country back on a much more responsible fiscal path. >> including getting rid of the mortgage interest deduction or the charitable giving deduction? do you think those have to be
but it gets back to the issue of where are the power levers and the forcing mechanisms to make the government deal with the deficit? that's not coming from the markets. the bond market is saying here's the money you want and we're kind of creating these things out of nowhere to force us to deal with the long-term deficit problem but the short term markets aren't doing it. >> neil, talk about these markets you speak of. i want to play a clip of maria the other day. >> the markets right now are expecting a deal. the markets have been trading fine. if we don't gate deal, we are going to see a sizable decline in stocks. we are going to get a big disappointment. >> markets will be disappointed. the markets have expectations. who is this mr. markets that is endowed with the personality anç expectations and is this monolithic creature that will respond to, you know, what's going on in washington? are we giving the markets a little bit too much personality here? >> well, yeah. i mean, obviously the market is millions of people and institutions all over the world deciding whether to buy stocks or bon
members of the house but people who are anti-politics in a certain kind of way from the tea party, anti-government, anti-compromise, when they come in to your group, it is impossible to lead. by the way, imt not someone who at any point criticized john boehner's leadership skills. i believe all those criticisms were misplaced. he had a problem with who got elected under his party banner. it's not that previous speakers were better leaders than he was. previous speakers didn't have as many crazy people in the room with him. >> that's a good point. >> let's see how much the republicans appreciate his sage counsel if he says guys, we have to hike rates. i'm waiting for that. speaking of that, lawrence, i know you were there in washington when the clinton rates that we're all talking about now went into effect back in 1993. you probably remember the republicans saying there would be a second recession and millions of jobs lost and none of of that happened in the 1990s. now we're back at the point where democrats for a decade have fought the lower rates and saying we need clinton rates. if it's going t
unemployment rates but you have a short-term stimulus where the federal government comes in, more fema people coming in, you get a short-term boost in employment because of these disasters. the other thing that will happen with the fiscal cliff is the massive withdraw of government spending and we haven't talked about that as much as taxes. people with less money because of tax cuts going away would have less money to spend into the economy but also the federal government withdrawing federal spending from parts of the economy that are used to getting it, the military, et cetera but other sectors nonmilitary. that's the other piece that could hurt people. >> when we talk about the fiscal cliff and back and forth that is happening between the white house and the hill, i guess i'm confused because on one hand there is a sense that this is all par for the course, they know they're going to get a deal done, it's fine, everything is good and then there's also this sort of the pr blitz which is, we are very far from a deal. this is what ayman alluded to this, the speaker had a press conference a few
wants on the top 2% will run this government not for eight years or eight weeks or eight weeks but run this government for eight days, which means it's not a solution. the president is not interested in real policy solutions by evidenced by what he has proposed, he's interested in politics and that's the challenge that we have a getting through that and making certain that we not be talking politics, we talk about positive policy for american people, getting committee rolling and getting jobs created. >> the administration, as we've been saying, has said they're prepared to go over the cliff. we heard that from tim geithner. if republicans refuse to raise taxes on the wealthy and john boehner said yesterday that's unacceptable, though he admitted any revenue will be coming from the rich. let me play that for you. >> the revenues we're putting on the table are going to come from guess who? the rich. there are ways to limit deductions, close loopholes and have the same people pay more of their money to the federal government without raising tax rates, which we believe will harm our econo
-pays for those who can afford it. donald trump may need medication but he certainly doesn't need the government to pay for it. debt ceiling talks in the summer of 2011 geithner again ruled that out. >> not as part of a process to reduce the deficit the others face. >> republicans don't like owning reform either. this was tom cole on sunday. >> only obama can fix entitlements. democrat versus democrat fight over entitlement which mirrors their fighting over taxes. a response to an argument that was starting before former adviser steve ratner and minnesota democratic congressman keith ellison with near glee. there is no real choice about that. we're clear social security is off the table. this is, to me, the much more interesting debate between tom and dan. >> you want republicans arguing. both sides are also battling for control of the debt ceiling which may represent the republicans' greatest point of leverage in these budget talks. goo the speaker of the house says that's a nonstarter. >> silliness. congress will never give up the power. i've made it clear to the president. we need cuts in ref
, there will be hell to pay for all of us. you know who will pay? the people running the government. the politicians. good politicians don't take their countries off of cliffs. "the ed show" starts right now. >>> good evening, americans. welcome to "the ed show" live from washington, d.c. tonight, breaking news from the nation's capital. house democrats are turning the screws on house speaker bain. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> unfortunately, the speaker's proposal is still out of balance. >> the president responds to john boehner, but democratic leader nancy pelosi has a plan to get around the speaker. tonight, leader pelosi joins me for an exclusive interview. >>> senator john kerry like you have never seen him before. the statesman from massachusetts scolds the radical right after senate republicans block a u.n. treaty on rights for the disabled because they are concerned about home schooling. you don't want to miss this tape. >>> plus my interview with ohio senator sherrod brown on what looks like a massive win for progressives and elizabeth warren. >>> then senator debbi stabenow
of the federal government. these senates don't have that view. there will be another generation coming ae long. iraq and afghanistan war veterans. it will be interesting to see how they perform. >> great to have you with us tonight. thanks so much. that's "the ed show." "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. >> good evening, ed. thanks. and thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. it was a strange bomb shell in washington today. a little bit of news that came from an unexpected source. bob woodward got his hands on an audio recording of the top commanding general in afghanistan meeting off the record with a fox news analyst. the meeting took place last spring. it was general david petraeus who was at the time commander of all u.s. forces in the war in afghanistan. and on the tape, fox news analyst says that she was asked by her boss, by the chairman of fox news to pass along some very specific advice for general petraeus. >> if you're offered chairman, take it. if you're offered anything else, don't take it. resign in six months and run for president. okay? and i know you're not run
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 132 (some duplicates have been removed)